Colorado Proposition CC, Retain Revenue for Transportation and Education TABOR Measure (2019)

Colorado Proposition CC
Election date November 5, 2019
Topic State and local government budgets, spending and finance
Status d Defeated
Type State statute	Origin State legislature
List of Colorado measuresColorado Proposition CCColorado Proposition DDSubmit

Colorado Proposition CC, the Allow State to Retain Revenue for Transportation and Education Measure, was on the ballot in Colorado as a legislatively referred state statute on November 5, 2019. It was defeated.

A yes vote supported the measure to allow the state to retain revenue above the state spending cap to provide funding for transportation and education.

A no vote opposed the measure to allow the state to retain certain revenue for transportation and education, thus requiring the state to continue issuing refunds under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) when the state collects revenue in excess of the state's annual revenue limit.

Election results

Colorado Proposition CC
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		724,060	46.34%
No		838,282	53.66%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What was Proposition CC designed to do?

Proposition CC would have allowed the state to retain revenue it is required to refund under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR). Retained funds were designed to be used for education and transportation purposes. The TABOR Amendment limits the amount of money the state of Colorado can take in and spend. Revenue above a certain limit is refunded to taxpayers. The measure would have required the state auditor to hire a private entity to conduct an annual financial audit regarding use of funds as provided under the measure.

Campaigns for and against Proposition CC

Two committees were registered to support Proposition CC: the Great Education Colorado Issue Committee and Coloradans for Prosperity. The support campaign reported $4.64 million in contributions and $4.55 million in expenditures.

Three committees were registered to oppose Proposition CC: Citizens Against CC, No on CC, and Americans for Prosperity Colorado Issue Committee. The opposition campaign reported $1.92 million in contributions and $1.9 million in expenditures.

Measure design

Proposition CC would have allowed the state to retain revenue it is required to refund under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR). Retained funds were designed to only be used for education and transportation purposes. The measure would have required the state auditor to hire a private entity to conduct an annual financial audit regarding use of funds as provided under the measure.

The TABOR Amendment limits the amount of money the state of Colorado can take in and spend. The TABOR revenue limit is tied to inflation and the percentage change in state population. Any money collected above this limit is refunded to taxpayers unless the voters allow the state to spend it. Referendum C, approved by voters in 2005, allowed the state to keep and spend additional money above the TABOR limit, known as the Referendum C cap.

The Colorado Legislative Council Staff estimated that if Proposition CC were approved, the state would have retained $310 million above the TABOR limit in 2019-2020 and $342 million above the limit in 2020-2021.

The following table shows the Legislative Council Staff's estimate for how retained funds were designed to be used under Proposition CC:

Use	2020-21 budget year	2021-22 budget year
Public schools	$103 million	$114 million
Public higher education	$103 million	$114 million
State and local highway/transit projects	$103 million	$114 million

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition CC is below:

Proposition CC ballot title
Without raising taxes and to better fund public schools, higher education, and roads, bridges, and transit, within a balanced budget, may the state keep and spend all the revenue it annually collects after June 30, 2019, but is not currently allowed to keep and spend under Colorado law, with an annual independent audit to show how the retained revenues are spent?

Colorado Blue Book vote explanation

The Colorado Blue Book, prepared by the Colorado Legislative Council Staff, contained the following explanation of a yes and no vote:

Yes:

“

A "yes" vote on Proposition CC changes state law and means the state can keep all of the money it collects over its revenue limit to spend on education and transportation.

”

No:

“

A "no" vote on Proposition CC means that any money the state collects over its revenue limit must be refunded to taxpayers, as required under current law.

”

Full text

The full text of Proposition CC can be found here.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2019

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The state legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 27, and the FRE is 8. The word count for the ballot title is 59, and the estimated reading time is 15 seconds.

Support

Supporters

Legislative sponsors

Representatives KC Becker (D-13) and Julie McCluskie (D-61) and Senators Lois Court (D-31) and Kevin Priola (R-25) sponsored this measure as House Bill 1257 in the legislature.

Elected officials

• Colorado House Democrats and Colorado Senate Democrats
• Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D)
• Former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper (D)
• Former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter (D)
• Former Colorado Governor Roy Romer (D)
• Former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm (D)

Organizations

• Great Education Colorado
• The Colorado State University System Board of Governors
• The Metropolitan State University of Denver’s Board of Trustees
• Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce

City councils

• Denver City Council

Arguments

• Amendment sponsor KC Becker said, "Colorado’s had one of the strongest economies in the country and people think that the state itself can make more investments, more improvements, but we can’t because the state constitution prohibits the budget from growing with the economy. Is this the long-term fix to any of the state’s long-term issues? No, it’s not. I think it’s a necessary, important part of it."

• A statement from Colorado Governor Jared Polis' office said, "Gov. Polis supports allowing the state to keep the tax revenue it already collects. This common-sense policy doesn’t alter the right of citizens to vote on taxes, but allows Colorado to keep pace with a growing economy. The governor is engaging bipartisan civic leaders across the state because he believes broad bipartisan support is essential to win in November."

• Nancy Tuor, chairwoman of the Colorado State University System Board of Governors, said, "Since funds from Prop CC could go to support public funding of higher education, we felt it was important to support the Legislature in the action."

Official arguments

The supporting arguments provided for this measure in the Colorado 2019 Blue Book were as follows:

“

1) Proposition CC provides more money for critical investments in Colorado’s future without raising tax rates. By allowing the state to keep the money it already collects, the measure provides needed funding for K-12 education, higher education, and transportation. While Colorado currently ranks in the top third of states in household income, it ranks in the bottom third in per-pupil public spending on both K-12 and higher education. Further, the state’s roads are deteriorating while the cost of improvements continues to increase. Addressing these challenges requires statewide investment, and Proposition CC provides revenue for these investments immediately and into the future. 2) Proposition CC allows elected officials to make better policy decisions while preserving the citizens’ right to vote on any new state taxes and tax rate increases. Because these tax increases will still require voter approval if the measure passes, state government spending will remain limited. Proposition CC simply allows the state government to keep the money it already collects. Similar measures have been approved by voters in most Colorado counties, cities, and school districts.

”

Opposition

No on CC led the campaign in opposition to the measure.

Opponents

Elected officials and individuals

• U.S. Representative Ken Buck (CO-4)
• Colorado Representative Patrick Neville (R-45)
• Former Colorado Governor Bill Owens (R)
• Former U.S. Senator George Hanks "Hank" Brown (R)
• Douglas Bruce (R), author of the TABOR amendment
• Rep. Perry Buck (R-49)
• Jay Stooksberry, chair of the Libertarian Party of Delta County
• 18th Judicial District Attorney George Brauchler

Organizations

• Citizens Against CC
• Colorado House Republicans
• TaborYes
• Colorado Rising Action
• Independence Institute
• Americans for Prosperity of Colorado
• The TABOR Foundation
• Libertarian Party of Colorado
• Colorado Republican Party

Arguments

• On its website, Vote No on CC argued, "There is no guarantee as to where Proposition CC's money will go in the future. Despite the state budget growing by over $1B each and every year, the legislature still refuses to prioritize infrastructure. Giving more money to state government, without any reforms, is a bad deal for taxpayers. Since TABOR passed, our budget has grown 306%. State government has enough money, they just need to prioritize better. Currently, refund money is first used to help localities cover the senior and veterans’ property tax exemptions. Proposition CC would take that refund money away – putting seniors and veterans at risk – and putting more pressure on local budgets."

• House Minority Leader Patrick Neville (R-45) said, "It’s outlandish because we haven’t even hit the TABOR caps, we haven’t even had TABOR refunds but they try to blame [spending limits] on TABOR."

• State Director for Americans for Prosperity of Colorado Jesse Mallory said, "There’s no guarantees when it comes to HB1257 and HB1258. The only guarantee is that taxpayers will lose their TABOR refunds and government spending will increase. One legislature cannot bind future legislators to spend the money a specific way, so once the money comes in, they can spend it any way they like. These proposals are bad for Colorado taxpayers."

• Executive Director of Colorado Rising Action Michael Fields said, "Our state budget is going up by $1 billion again this year, but that’s not enough for some legislators. The reason the last 6 statewide tax hikes were defeated is because voters want the legislature to prioritize the existing budget. Setting up a new slush fund with our TABOR refunds is definitely not the solution Coloradans are looking for."

• Director of SpringsTaxpayers.com Laura Carno said, "The beauty of our Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights is its simplicity, as all that a tax increase requires to go into effect is voter consent. TABOR refunds are, by definition, a refund of taxpayers’ having overpaid into our already-bloated state government. Speaker Becker and the Boulder Democrats in charge at the Capitol are going to ask voters not only to raise taxes, but to permanently relinquish tax dollars that they never owed the government in the first place."

Official arguments

The opposing arguments provided for this measure in the Colorado 2019 Blue Book were as follows:

“

1) Proposition CC results in higher taxes by permanently eliminating all state TABOR refunds required by the Colorado Constitution. Taxpayers are being asked to sacrifice their refunds to pay for programs that should already be funded within the state budget. Even with the limit, the state government has already shifted money between funds and raised fees and tolls to increase its revenue faster than inflation and state population growth. Proposition CC will cause government to expand at an even faster pace. 2) Proposition CC continues to erode taxpayer protections in the Colorado Constitution. Instead of asking voters for permission to keep specific amounts of money collected above the revenue limit each year, the state government is asking voters to give up refunds of unknown amounts forever. The measure broadly directs where the new money will be spent, but the specifics can be changed in the future without voter approval. Further, while spending this new money for education and transportation, the legislature could redirect existing funds to any other purpose.

”

Campaign advertisements

The following video was released by No on CC:

Title: "No on CC - Blank Check"

Media editorials

See also: 2019 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

• The Steamboat Pilot & Today: "In addition to helping to fund Colorado’s crumbling transportation infrastructure, Proposition CC would also boost funding for education, which we think is crucial to the future of our state, which currently ranks in the bottom third of the nation when it comes to per-pupil funding at the K-12 level. Proposition CC also requires an annual audit of funding, which ensures transparency and allows taxpayers to know exactly how money is being spent. We realize that Proposition CC is a De-Brucing at the state level, but we believe TABOR needs to be addressed due to the unintended consequences it has had on the state’s ability to fund core services. Proposition CC provides a mechanism to address TABOR’s flaws, and that is one of the reasons why we believe it deserves voter support."

• The Colorado Springs Business Journal: "Colorado’s Proposition CC effectively 'de-Bruces' the state, allowing the legislature to keep excess revenue and use it for transportation and education, instead of refunding it to residents. ...TABOR prevents the General Assembly from being able to save adequately for the inevitable economic downturn, so during recessions, the state is forced to cut services. With that extra money... we could improve roads across the state... [and] we could improve educational outcomes for students. We have a growing workforce skills gap, and voting for Proposition CC will support skills development for the future that matches the needs of Colorado businesses."

• Grand Junction Daily Sentinel: "These are real dollars that would go to fund real projects and programs in Mesa County and across the Western Slope as opposed to "refunds" to taxpayers in the form of a slightly lower income tax rate. ...Opponents characterize CC as a tax increase. That's a stretch in our opinion. Semantics aside, tax rates aren't being raised and voters will still be asked to approve future tax increases if Prop CC passes."

• The Daily Camera: "If voters approve CC money for K-12 education, higher learning, and transportation, that’s where it better go. ... Approval of Proposition CC would allow the General Assembly to do a better job of representing the people of Colorado."

• The Pueblo Chieftain: "Colorado’s spending on higher education ranks fourth lowest in the country. How are we doing on transportation spending? Well, you don’t need to study any rankings to get an answer to that. All you have to do is take a trip to Denver’s metro area or one of the state’s ski resorts during any semi-busy time to experience the frustration of gridlocked roads. Approving Proposition CC on the November ballot would help address all of those problems. The statewide measure would dedicate excess tax money collected above the amount adjusted for inflation and population growth toward K-12 schools, colleges and universities, and transportation needs."

• The Journal: "CC is effectively a tax increase. If you pay more than you should in taxes and the state keeps the overage, your taxes went up even if the rate did not. ... Most taxpayers will not miss it much, while proponents say it could raise an additional several hundred millions of dollars a year in some years, to be used for education and transportation. ...To the extent this new revenue is dedicated to infrastructure and repair, it is a sound investment that should grow in value over time."

• Boulder Weekly: "Prop CC isn’t perfect — despite the annual audit, opponents are right to be concerned about the direction and accountability of funds collected above the TABOR cap. But we recommend a yes vote to begin addressing critical education and transportation needs, and we think foregoing a personal tax refund in boom years, and letting that money pool with the rest of the state’s taxpayers, will produce a greater good."

Opposition

• The Colorado Springs Gazette: "If Proposition CC passes on November’s ballot, gutting the public’s right to consent, Colorado’s economy will suffer. Politicians who support the measure will deserve the blame. Politicians want more, despite the fact they are awash in more than $1 billion in surplus money annually that does not exceed the TABOR threshold. They cannot get enough to feed their insatiable appetites for more of the private sector’s hard-earned cash. [Opposing Prop CC] means saying yes to economic growth, high employment, rising wages, robust tax revenues, and generous charitable donations. Hold the governed above the governing class. Protect the right of consent by trouncing CC on November’s ballot."

• The Denver Post: Colorado lawmakers can do better than Proposition CC. We recommend voters mark 'no' on their ballots. ... That money could do great things for this state if voters say yes to Proposition CC. However, we only get one shot at spending these dollars, and lawmakers simply missed the mark, especially given that this is going to be the plan for these dollars for the foreseeable future. For example, a third of the funding will go to public schools, which sounds great. But the money does not go through the normal education funding formula. Instead, the money will be doled out to school districts on a per-pupil basis, equally across all districts. That may sound fair, but it isn’t. ... Creating an ever-growing fund of money that is outside the formula will only increase existing disparities. As the funds set aside through Proposition CC grow, so will the distance between school districts that have resources and those that do not. ... Money set aside for higher education also will not go through the typical funding formula for our state-owned universities and colleges. ... We fear it’ll be spent on pet projects instead of on reducing the cost of higher education for the next generation of Colorado students. ... Yes, the state does need this additional revenue. But it’s also critical that this money is spent like the limited resource it is given voters’ unwillingness to provide alternative revenue sources."

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Colorado ballot measures

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recently scheduled reports processed by Ballotpedia, which covered through November 30, 2019.

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$4,638,093.25
Opposition:	$1,921,849.90

Two committees were registered to support Proposition CC: the Great Education Colorado Issue Committee and Coloradans for Prosperity. The support campaign reported $4.64 million in contributions and $4.55 million in expenditures.

Three committees were registered to oppose Proposition CC: Citizens Against CC, No on CC, and Americans for Prosperity Colorado Issue Committee. The opposition campaign reported $1.92 million in contributions and $1.9 million in expenditures.

Support

Committees in support of Proposition CC Supporting committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Great Education Colorado Issue Committee $186,730.00 $0.00 $146,774.47 Coloradans for Prosperity $4,425,186.00 $26,177.25 $4,378,000.05 Total $4,611,916.00 $26,177.25 $4,524,774.52

Totals in support Total raised: $4,638,093.25 Total spent: $4,550,951.77

Top donors

The following were the top six donors to the support campaign.

Donor	Amount
Daniel Ritchie (University of Denver Chancellor Emeritus)	$1,000,000.00
North Fund	$517,000.00
Strategic Victory Fund	$500,000.00
Pat Stryker	$500,000.00
Gary Community Investment Company	$400,000.00
Education Reform Now Advocacy	$400,000.00

Opposition

Committees in opposition to Proposition CC Opposing committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Americans for Prosperity Colorado Issue Committee $50.00 $1,651,360.86 $0.00 Citizens Against CC $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 No on CC $208,552.00 $61,887.04 $182,388.47 Total $208,602.00 $1,713,247.90 $182,388.47

Totals in opposition Total raised: $1,921,849.90 Total spent: $1,895,636.37

Top donors

The following were the top five donors to the opposition campaign. Amounts include cash and in-kind contributions.

Donor	Amount
Americans for Prosperity	$1,651,360.86
Defend Colorado	$100,000.00
Independence Institute	$50,680.58
Colorado Rising Action	$12,900.00
Springs Taxpayers	$12,900.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Polls

See also: Ballotpedia's approach to covering polls and 2020 ballot measure polls

The following poll by Magellan Strategies read the ballot language of Proposition CC to respondents and asked them how they would vote. Of 500 respondents, 54% said they would vote to approve Proposition CC, 30% said they would vote against it, and 15% were undecided.

Colorado Proposition CC
Poll	Support	Oppose	Undecided	Margin of error	Sample size
Magellan Strategies poll 8/5/19 - 8/7/19	54.0%	30.0%	15.0%	+/-4.38	500
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Background

The TABOR Amendment, approved by voters in 1992, limits the amount of money the state of Colorado can take in and spend. The TABOR revenue limit is tied to inflation and the percentage change in state population. Any money collected above this limit is refunded to taxpayers unless the voters allow the state to spend it. Referendum C, approved by voters in 2005, allowed the state to keep and spend additional money above the TABOR limit, known as the Referendum C cap.

Implementing legislation: House Bill 1258

The implementing legislation, House Bill 1258, was a companion bill to Proposition CC that outlined specific details in state statutes necessary to carry out the measure, contingent on the measure's approval.

The full text of HB 1258 can be found here.

Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR)

This measure required voter approval under TABOR since it would allow the state to retain revenue that would otherwise be refunded to taxpayers.

The TABOR Amendment requires voter approval for all new taxes, tax rate increases, extensions of expiring taxes, mill levy increases, valuation for property assessment increases, or tax policy changes resulting in increased tax revenue. The Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights was passed in 1992 as Initiative 1 by a vote of 53.68% to 46.32%. The measure was spearheaded by Colorado activist Douglas Bruce (R).

TABOR limits the amount of money the state of Colorado can take in and spend. It limits the annual increase for some state revenue to inflation plus the percentage change in state population. Any money collected above this limit is refunded to taxpayers unless the voters allow the state to spend it.

Referendum C of 2005

Referendum C, approved by voters in 2005, authorized the state to retain and spend all of the money it collected above the TABOR limit on healthcare, public education, transportation projects, and local fire and police pensions for five years beginning with fiscal year (FY) 2005-06. During these five years, Colorado residents did not receive the refunds they would have otherwise received under TABOR. After the five-year period, referred to as "the timeout period," Referendum C authorized the state to permanently retain and spend revenue up to a cap, referred to as "the Referendum C cap" (equaling FY 2007-08 revenues adjusted by inflation plus population growth), beginning in FY 2010-11.

When state voters approve a tax increase or other revenue change, the resulting revenues are exempt from the TABOR limit on fiscal year spending. Below is a chart by the Colorado Legislative Council Staff detailing revenue limits under TABOR:

TABOR refund estimates, 2019-2021

The following chart using data from the Colorado Legislative Council Staff shows the estimated TABOR refunds for Colorado taxpayers for the years 2019-2021.

TABOR ballot measures

Since 1992, when TABOR was adopted, through 2018, Colorado voters have decided on 19 ballot measures that would have increased revenue for the state, proposals that required voter approval under TABOR. The subjects of the 19 measures were as follows:

• Four measures asked voters if the state could retain revenue that would have otherwise been refunded to taxpayers under TABOR;
• Four measures asked voters to adopt a new tax;
• Two measures asked voters to eliminate a tax exemption;
• Eight measures asked voters to adopt a tax increase; and
• One measure asked voters to adopt a tax increase and eliminate a tax exemption.

Four (21%) of the 19 measures were approved while 15 (79%) were defeated.

The four measures that were approved included the following:

• Colorado Tobacco Tax Increase for Health-Related Purposes, Initiative 35 (2004);
• Colorado State Business Income Tax Deduction Limit, Referendum H (2006);
• Colorado Proposition AA, Taxes on the Sale of Marijuana (2013); and
• Colorado Marijuana TABOR Refund Measure, Proposition BB (2015).

In addition to the above measures, Referendum C, approved by voters in 2005, authorized the state to retain and spend all of the money it collected above the TABOR limit on healthcare, public education, transportation projects, and local fire and police pensions for five years beginning with fiscal year (FY) 2005-06.

Marijuana tax TABOR refund measure, 2015

Proposition BB, the Marijuana TABOR Refund Measure, was approved in Colorado in 2015. It allowed the state to retain $66 million in collected marijuana tax revenue, which otherwise would have been refunded under TABOR. Retained revenue was designed to be used for school construction, youth programs, marijuana education, law enforcement services, substance abuse programs, and more.

CDOT reports funding levels

In 2016, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) reported that from 2016 through 2040 it would need $46 billion to cover transportation costs, which included $20 billion in projects to expand transportation infrastructure. CDOT estimated that from 2016 through 2025, it would need $19 billion, with $8.6 billion of that going toward expansion. The anticipated funding levels for CDOT at that time were $21.1 billion for the 25-year period and $10.2 billion for the 10-year period, leaving a funding discrepancy of $24.9 billion over 25 years and $8.8 billion over the following 10 years, respectively.

Transportation on the ballot in Colorado

2018 citizen initiatives and 2020 bond issue

Two initiatives, Proposition 109 ("Fix Our Damn Roads") and Proposition 110 ("Let's Go Colorado"), appeared on the 2018 general election ballot in Colorado. Both measures were defeated, triggering a bond issue to be placed on the November 2019 ballot, though it was moved by the legislature to the 2020 ballot.

Proposition 109 was designed to authorize $3.5 billion in bonds fund statewide transportation projects—including bridge expansion, construction, maintenance, and repairs—and to require that the state repay the debt from the general fund without raising taxes. This measure was backed by Fix Our Damn Roads. Top donors included the Independence Institute and the Colorado Economic Leadership Fund.

Proposition 110 was designed to authorize $6 billion in bonds to fund transportation projects, establish the Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes Citizen Oversight Committee, and raise the state sales tax rate by 0.62% from 2.9% (2018) to 3.52% for 20 years starting on January 1, 2019, through January 1, 2039. This measure was backed by Coloradans for a Responsible Future and Coloradans for Coloradans. Top donors included the Colorado Construction Industry and the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce.

The 2020 bond issue would authorize $1.837 billion in bonds with no increase to any taxes to fund statewide transportation projects with a maximum repayment cost of $2.56 billion over 20 years.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Colorado

The state process

In Colorado, a legislatively referred state statute must be passed by a simple majority vote in each chamber of the state legislature. Legislatively referred measures do not need to be signed by the governor. Due to the Colorado TABOR, statewide voter approval is required to enact any legislation to increase government revenue at a faster rate than the combined rate of population increase and inflation.

House Bill 1257 was introduced by Democratic Rep. KC Becker in the House on March 20, 2019. It passed in the House along party lines (41-23) with all Democrats voting in favor and all Republicans voting in opposition on April 16, 2019. The measure passed in the Senate on April 29, 2019, in a vote of 20-15. All no votes came from Republicans. One Republican, measure sponsor Kevin Priola (R-25), joined all Senate Democrats in voting yes.

Vote in the Colorado House of Representatives April 16, 2019
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 33  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	41	23	1
Total percent	63.07%	35.38%	1.53%
Democrat	41	0	0
Republican	0	23	1

Vote in the Colorado State Senate April 29, 2019
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 18  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	20	15	0
Total percent	57.14%	42.86%	0.0%
Democrat	19	0	0
Republican	1	15	0

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Colorado

Poll times

In Colorado, polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. local time for those who choose to vote in person rather than by mail. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.

Registration requirements

Check your voter registration status here.

In Colorado, an individual can register to vote if he or she is at least 16 years old and will be 18 by Election Day. A voter must be a citizen of the United States who has lived in Colorado at least 22 days prior to Election Day.

Colorado voters can register to vote through Election Day. However, in order to automatically receive a mail-in ballot, a voter must register at least eight days prior to Election Day. A voter can register online or submit a form in person or by fax, email, or mail.

Automatic registration

Colorado automatically registers eligible individuals to vote through the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

Colorado has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

Colorado allows same-day voter registration for individuals who vote in person.

Residency requirements

Colorado law requires 22 days of residency in the state before a person may vote.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Colorado does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration.

Verifying your registration

The site Go Vote Colorado, run by the Colorado Secretary of State office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

Colorado requires voters to present non-photo identification when voting in person. If voting by mail for the first, a voter may also need to return a photocopy of his or her identification with his or her mail-in ballot. Click here for more information.

The following list of accepted forms of identification was current as of April 2023. Click here for the most current information, sourced directly from the Office of the Colorado Secretary of State.

“

The following documents are acceptable forms of identification: A valid Colorado driver’s license or valid identification card issued by the Colorado Department of Revenue. (Note: documents issued to not lawfully present and temporarily lawfully present individuals under Part 5 of Article 2 of Title 42, C.R.S. are not acceptable forms of identification.) A valid U.S. passport. A valid employee identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by any branch, department, agency, or entity of the U.S. government or of Colorado, or by any county, municipality, board, authority, or other political subdivision of Colorado. A valid pilot’s license issued by the federal aviation administration or other authorized agency of the U.S. A valid U.S. military identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector. A copy of a current (within the last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector. A Certificate of Degree of Indian or Alaskan Native Blood. A valid Medicare or Medicaid card issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. A certified copy of a U.S. birth certificate for the elector. Certified documentation of naturalization. A valid student identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by an institute of higher education in *Colorado, as defined in section 23-3.1-102(5), C.R.S.. A valid veteran identification card issued by the U.S. department of veterans affairs veterans health administration with a photograph of the eligible elector. A valid identification card issued by a federally recognized tribal government certifying tribal membership. Any form of identification listed above that shows your address must show a Colorado address to qualify as an acceptable form of identification. The following documents are also considered acceptable forms of identification for voting: Verification that a voter is a resident of a group residential facility, as defined in section 1-1-104(18.5), C.R.S. Verification that a voter is a person committed to the department of human services and confined and eligible to register and vote shall be considered sufficient identification of such person for the purposes of section 1-2-210.5, C.R.S. Written correspondence from the county sheriff or his or her designee to the county clerk indicating that a voter is confined in a county jail or detention facility.

”

See also

2019 measures

• 2019 ballot measures
• Budgets on the ballot
• Education on the ballot
• Transportation on the ballot
• 2019 petition deadlines

Colorado

• Colorado ballot measures
• Colorado initiative laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls
• Ballot measure signature costs

External links

• HB 1257 overview
• HB 1257 full text
• Colorado 2019 Blue Book